D&D General A paladin just joined the group. I'm a necromancer.

[Maxperson]

So it's homebrew or house rule for an Orc to not be evil? Just making sure I understand.

Take your pick. Whichever you choose will be a change from the default rules.

 

[Maxperson]

@Chaosmancer - I just realized the perfect argument that would have made sense to them. That "those who frequently animate the dead are evil" isn't a rule - it's just flavor text.

Some fluff are rules. That would be one of them. It has a mechanical effect, like Oaths do.

 

[Helldritch]

Take your pick. Whichever you choose will be a change from the default rules.

He is right on that account. But it also depends on the setting. Some setting are not following the normal rule.

 

[Maxperson]

He is right on that account. But it also depends on the setting. Some setting are not following the normal rule.

Setting specific changes are homebrew, even if from official settings.

 

[Helldritch]

Setting specific changes are homebrew, even if from official settings.

Again right.... damn I'm not gaining points here...

 

[Chaosmancer]

No. I showed that FLUFF was conflicting, and it doesn't actually conflict since nothing in the orc entry says that they always act in those manners. Not the same thing as RAW in most circumstances, including this one.

Wait, so now FLUFF is not RAW?

Why then are skeletons and zombies evil? Because before I kept getting told that is because, by RAW, they are evil spirits bound to murder machines. But that is fluff, so if fluff isn't RAW, are they just evil... because?

I mean, if you just want the mechanics then "Evil is Evil because it is Evil" is as deep as you are going to go.

If the DM changes it, sure. Not by default, though. Default is by the alignment section the stat block.

Which you keep arguing for changing with the orcs.

So you're argument is that simply being evil is a lethal attack on the PCs? That's bupkis. Orcs by default fluff do not always attack, therefore unless they are attacking there is no self-defense argument. If you walk in and hack down non-attack orcs, you are evil.

The only fluff you can quote is from the half-orc. I gave nearly a page of orcs attacking and desiring bloodshed.

Even if we accept all of it is true, then we are looking at very slim odds. You are much more likely to be encountering hostile forces who will attempt to kill you than anything else.

Theater of war and self-defense point to not walking up and politely asking if they plan on killing you, but obviously this is just going to keep spinning in a circle

RAW allows you to homebrew, therefore homebrewing them to be non-evil is a RAW way to make them non-evil. Simple and done.

So RAW non-evil undead

Like I was saying pages ago. And that you argued against.

Some fluff are rules. That would be one of them. It has a mechanical effect, like Oaths do.

Only if you start talking about Artifacts. Pretty much nothing else in the game cares about good and evil of mortals

Well, if you see it that way...
The solution would be to create a new spell that create non evil undead. Otherwise, the spell would always create evil undead. Then, you have to find a deity that would not be offended by such a blatant attack on the cosmology. Not counting Orcus, lord of the undead that would be quite p***d off by such an attack on his lordship. Not counting the different life deities that would be offended by such an act coming from a non evil person.

On a more serious note. No it would not work this way. An exception to the rule is not something you can reproduce at will. If you can reproduce it at will, it is no longer an exception but a pattern. A pattern is not an exception and thus become a rule on its own.

Edit: Damn the auto corrector...

See the Osiris argument from before. I provided a LG diety and a LN diety who are specifically listed as giving the death domain to lawful good clerics. The Death Domain has "animate dead" on the domain spell list.

Also, there is no need to alter Animate Dead, because the words "good" or "evil" never appear within that spell. It is the statblock of the monster alone which makes the spell evil, because that is the first time evil appears within the context of the spell.

 

[Flamestrike]

Town 1, the most powerful person is a tyrannical warlord who enlsaved the town. The Orc kills him, and the people view him as a savior for releasing them from their bonds. To them, he is good, a hero.

Town 2, the most powerful person is a saint, a warrior of light who helps the downtrodden and protects the people. The Orc kills him, and the people view him as a monster who sundered their hope. To them, he is evil, a villain.

Objectively, is he Evil or Good?

You're giving me the subjective views of the people in the town(s) and asking me to give the Orc an objective alignment.

But (given the information above) I would say the Orc is objectively evil. He murdered a man for no good reason (not in self defence, or the defence of others).

Let us say that over a million towns, he only kills three people seen as good people. All the rest were clearly villains. Does that change your answer?

No, it does not. The alignment of his victims does not matter in and of itself. If he's killing people for reasons other than self defence (or the defence of others) and/or when other options reasonably present themselves, he's evil.

Sure, your fridge is in your kitchen. But, let us say that you don't actually own your home, and the bank takes custody of your property. The Fridge has not moved. Yet, it is now no longer in your kitchen. If something is objectively true in the moment, but objectively false later, without changing the object itself, only time, is it ever objectively true?

Yes, it is.

Grazzt, the Demon Lord was once a LE Devil. The fact he was once LE is objectively true (regardless of what he, you or I subjectively think about that fact) as is the fact he is now CE.

Grazzt might think of himself as being a Good guy. That's his subjective reality. We are in a privileged position to know the objective truth of Grazzts alignment.

Clearly the orc gods are evil, they are encouraging war against the "civilized" race. So, you will ban worship of them, correct? And, you want to redeem them, so you will install churches to the good gods in their place, teaching them the correct religions.

Have to keep an eye on the orcs to make sure they abide by the treaty, and they are your prisoners after all, so you will install overseers to watch them. Maybe move them from their current homes into homes more conveniently located for you to observe them.

What jobs could they have? Most jobs involve tools that could be used as weapons. So, the safest options would be to monitor the tools, make sure they aren't hording items that could be used as weapons. Only the most trusted orcs who agree with your overseers that their people need redeemed would be allowed to gain knowledge such as blacksmithing, which is vital to the community, but could lead to weapons being created.

Their cultural rituals would need to be banned. Most orc rituals involve violence and bloodshed and clearly are no longer acceptable. Maybe you could take a few and change them to better suit the type of rituals that you find acceptable.

I could go on, but I think you can see that while what you are saying sounds good, the reality matches with some of the most evil actions ever taken upon the face of earth. And, you defend it the exact same way. You are good and doing good, the people you are helping are evil and need guidance.

You take whatever reasonable and proportionate steps are required to stop violence.

Remember; you've posted an absolutely extreme example here. These Orc villagers nearby are hell bent on growing as a force, invading your lands, and murdering everyone. In your post; nothing short of genocide will stop them.

I see signing them up to a treaty, banning the worship of an evil pantheon of Gods (or at the very least, banning any evil practices of those Gods like sacrifice and so on), disarming them, and steering them away from murder, bloodshed and rape to be good acts.

Unless the DM says otherwise means I am talking about RAW.

'Unless the DM says otherwise' IS RAW. That;s the precise rule, copied from the MM, word for word.

You cant talk about a monsters alignment in the absence of DM discretion.

You are dodging the question. What about warforged makes them alive while Modrons are not alive.

The books say they are alive. They're not constructs; they're humanoids. They're expressly alive, sentient and sapient. They even had a subtype in 3.5 called 'living'.

In 3.5 they were contructs, a sub-type called "living constructs" but I would ask the same question then as I am now, what makes them alive?

Beats me what makes them alive (heck; beats me what makes you or I alive); but they are.

 

[Maxperson]

Wait, so now FLUFF is not RAW?

No, not NOW. I been saying that stuff in the description was fluff this entire time. Haven't you been paying attention?

Why then are skeletons and zombies evil? Because before I kept getting told that is because, by RAW, they are evil spirits bound to murder machines. But that is fluff, so if fluff isn't RAW, are they just evil... because?

You can tell the difference between a stat block and the fluff description, right?

The only fluff you can quote is from the half-orc. I gave nearly a page of orcs attacking and desiring bloodshed.

And not one shred of of what you quoted said "always."

Even if we accept all of it is true, then we are looking at very slim odds. You are much more likely to be encountering hostile forces who will attempt to kill you than anything else.

Slim odds are irrelevant. Slim still leaves open that orcs don't have to kill on sight, so attacking without being attacked first leaves the group engaging in an evil act.

So RAW non-evil undead

IF...............you homebrew. You have to use the rules to homebrew in order to achieve it.

Only if you start talking about Artifacts. Pretty much nothing else in the game cares about good and evil of mortals

It counts.

See the Osiris argument from before. I provided a LG diety and a LN diety who are specifically listed as giving the death domain to lawful good clerics. The Death Domain has "animate dead" on the domain spell list.

So what. That doesn't mean they approve of the spell.

 

[Helldritch]

See the Osiris argument from before. I provided a LG diety and a LN diety who are specifically listed as giving the death domain to lawful good clerics. The Death Domain has "animate dead" on the domain spell list.

Do not mix up the deities or the functions. They gave the death domain but it does not mean that Osiris promotes the creation of undead at large. The only undead that Osiris allows are Mummies. Mummies are the guardian of the rest of the Pharaoh and are a special case. Mummies are created through the use of positive energy that makes them not hungry for the living and especialy apt at following instructions not to the letter but to the intent. Mummies were often willing to become mummies and thus are a special case. Osiris would be quite unhappy with a follower using animate dead to animate "mere" skeletons and zombies. Doing that would fall under a strict "It is a hopeless situation, I have to do it" and even then it would require the perpetrator to atone for his/her sins (I think that only males could be a priest of Osiris but I am not sure). Think of it as a last resort that Osiris gives to his follower. You better not do it, but if you have to, do it. The caster better cast it on non followers or enemies or else he might have a very bad consequences. Even then he will have to answer for his action. The kind of "We'll talk about it afterward and see if it was really that desperate to use this spell."

Also, there is no need to alter Animate Dead, because the words "good" or "evil" never appear within that spell. It is the statblock of the monster alone which makes the spell evil, because that is the first time evil appears within the context of the spell.

Again, this is a remnant of the 4th edition (if I remember correctly). They want magic to be compared to a tool. A tool is not inherently evil. IT works with a real tool like a sword, but not with magic. In previous editions (1ed, 2ed and 3.xed.) The spell has always been tagged as evil and so are undead. A tool that can only summon evil is evil. No gray in here. I do not have to see something explicitly written to know that it not a good thing to do. Logic is to be used at all times.

 

[Greenfield]

It's my understanding they do respond to stimuli. Nothing complex, but enough to the signal digestion of a cell wall or injection. I'm certainly open to being educated on the subject.

I included link on that, but it was easy to miss.

Here it is, with all the trimmings.: What Are Viruses and How Do They Work?

Spoiler: Long biology stuff

Simply put a virus is a gene sequence, some as short as two genes, others as long as eight. There's a coating that protects the gene sequence. It serves double duty in that it also fools cells into thinking that it's food. They don't move on their own at all. They don't eat, they don't grow, and all they do to prompt a cell to ingest them is to sit there and look like food. Once inside that protective coating, the one lat looks like food, gets digested by the cell because it really is food. After that you have a cell with two DNA sets inside, and the two battle for control of the cell. When the virus wins the cell starts producing more of the virus.

Note that the virus can't reproduce on its own. No cell structure, no ongoing biochemical reactions. You can't kill it in any normal sense either, since it isn't alive n any normal sense to begin with.

Short form: It has all the sentience of a rock.